Spears+v.+Jefferson+Parish+School

** November 16, 1994  ** ** Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fifth Circuit **  ** Background: ** In this case, a PE teacher at Woodland Elementary School had two kindergarten students to participate in a joke on another student to make the child believe his classmates had been killed by the PE teacher for misbehaving and not listening in class. The coach and the two students played out a scene where they pretended to be dead. The student Justin Spears was unaware that the coach and other students were playing a joke. The teacher did not let Justin know it was a joke until after Justin saw the boys playing dead. The event caused Justin extreme emotional distress and he was diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. Justin’s behavior changed dramatically that began interfering with his school and home life to the point that he had to undergo therapy. At the trial it was established that Justin would require up to five more years of therapy in addition to the time already passed. The district was found liable for tort damages for emotional harm. ** Decision/Rational: ** The court found in favor of the plaintiffs. Spears were awarded money to pay for the therapy Justin has already received and for future therapy. The parent’s were also given a small amount to help compensate for the loss of interaction within the family due to the trauma Justin has suffered. The School Board did not agree with the decision and appealed the reasons for their appeal was that they felt Justin’s injuries did not require the amount that was awarded, they did not believe that there was a loss of interaction between Justin and his parents and also they did not believe the family acted in the best interest of Justin. The appeal was denied and the court agreed with the lower courts that the amount awarded was justified given the extent of emotional harm. The parents relationship with their child has been affected because of this event and that the parents began seeking help for their son immediately after the event. ** Implications: ** This obviously shows how much influence teachers have on their students. Even though the intent of the event was just a joke and was supposed to be harmless the actions has forever changed the life of the student and of their family. As teachers we are “super hero” like. Our students look to us to model expected behaviors and to have the answers to all of their questions. We need to use our influence over our students in a positive manner, push and inspire our students. Our actions no matter how big or how small influence our student’s thoughts and actions. We must consider every action we make because it can have lasting effects on others lives.  ** Question: ** ** What would you do if presented with a situation like this, how could you avoid falling into the temptation of joking with a student? **  ** Kari Graves **  Spears v. Jefferson Parish Board of Education Decided November 16, 1994   Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fifth Circuit __ Background __ Justin Spears was a kindergarten student at Woodland West Elementary School of Jefferson Parish, Louisiana on February 28, 1989. It was rainy, so instead of going outside for their Physical Education class, the class was sitting on the floor in the cafeteria. One of the coaches left the room with two boys that were being disruptive. He had already threatened to “kill them”, and this intrigued the boys. Upon questioning, Coach Brooks began teasing them with imaginary plans of executing them. He thought it would be fun to play a prank on Justin, who was one of their friends; he told Justin that he had hanged the boys and then had one of the boys pretend to be dead. Coach Brooks told him that it was a joke but not until after he saw his friend lying on the floor.
 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Spears v. Jefferson Parish Board of Education  **

This event disturbed Justin so much so that he regressed to the behavior of an infant. Experts for the plaintiffs diagnosed him with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, separation anxiety, and social phobia. At the time of trial, they projected that he would need 3-5 years of therapy in addition to the two years since the incident. Experts for the defendant agreed on Justin’s current condition, but did not believe that he suffered from PTSD. It was shown that prior to the offense, Justin was developing as expected and had no behavior problems. It was only after that when Justin began experiencing these difficulties, to the point of interfering with family activities inside and outside the home.

__ Decision and Rationale __ The trial court found in favor of the plaintiffs and awarded them a total of $117,658. This included past and future therapy for Justin and $100,000 for general damages. It also factored in $5,000 for each parent loss of consortium.

The defendants appealed on three main points, the first of which is the amount of the award; they contended that the award was unreasonably high in light of the minor extent of Justin’s injuries. Secondly, the court’s application of “loss of consortium” in this case was faulty by definition; there was no diminished affection or companionship. Lastly, they assert that his parents’ actions did nothing to alleviate the consequences; rather they were very fearful, and their anxiety exacerbated the situation.

The Court of Appeal affirmed the decision of the lower court, deciding to rely on evaluation of the experts and supporting evidence of the enormity of injury. The court’s position on awards is not to make any adjustments if they agree with the lower court on the degree of injury. The court differed on their opinion of the reason for loss of consortium, but did find that the family unit was affected since Justin wouldn’t go on family trips anymore. Furthermore, the court noted that his parents sought counseling for him immediately and made many attempts to put the therapists’ suggestions into action.

__ Implications __

This case clearly shows the negative influence and impact teachers can have on children. One would think that perhaps teachers need to be monitored closer, or that maybe proper screening wasn’t done before this teacher was hired. It would be justified to inquire as to why the other coach did not intervene since he was a co-teacher. The need for more supervision of teachers is a highly debatable issue, but circumstances such as these are a reason for pause. A teacher candidate’s disposition should be scrutinized during the application process, and the candidate themselves should remember who their audience will be once they have a teaching position. In any event, the individual should be held accountable and face serious consequences, including termination, loss of teaching credentials, and financial repercussions. It is surprising that Coach Brooks was not named as a defendant, nor was any penalty against him mentioned in the court papers. In this situation, it appears the school system paid the price.

__Essay Question__ How would you handle a situation in which a teacher goes into a room with one or two students and closes the door? Is there a point where you would intervene, and if so, how would you do it?

Reviewed independently by Eileen Boyd